alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-11199 (Summary Calendar)

JAMES EDWARD HIGHTOWER,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

(3:96-CV-913)

April 15, 1997

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT: *

ON REHEARING

Following execution of our order granting respondentappellee’s motion to expand the record on appeal to include state2

court records, we granted respondent-appellee’s petition for panel

rehearing. We have now revisited the record as thus expanded and

considered it in light of respon dent-appellee’s said motion and

petition, as well as petitioner-appellant’s motion for Certificate

of Probable Cause, which we construed and continue to construe as

a motion for a Certificate of Appealability (COA). Our review and

the now-complete record on appeal satisfies us that our ori ginal

grant of COA was erroneous, as was our vacatur of the judgment of

the district court and our remand to that court with instructions,

particularly in light of the revelation that the district court had

the state court records before it when it denied COA to petitionerappellant.

We therefore vacate and withdraw our judgment filed February

12, 1997, thereby revoking our grant of COA t o petitionerappellant, our vacatur of the judgment of the district court, and

our remand to that court; and we now affirm the original judgment

of the district court in all respects.

AFFIRMED.
#### Joseph V. Coppola et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*John Dougherty, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Suffolk County,

November 14, 1958.

Edwards, *Froehlich & McDonough*for defendant.

*Michael M. Frasca*for plaintiffs.

D. Ormonde Ritchie, J.

The defendant makes this motion for an order pursuant to subdivision 4 of rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice for an order dismissing the complaint upon the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. There are four causes of action alleged in the complaint, one on behalf of each of four plaintiffs. Each cause of action seeks recovery of damages for a statement made by defendant concerning the plaintiffs in the following words alleged by plaintiffs to be slanderous and defamatory: “ That many residents signed it under pressure and intimidation from undesirable characters.” It is alleged that the words were uttered concerning plaintiffs’ activities in circulating a petition favoring down-zoning of a parcel of property in North Bellport, New York. The words spoken by defendant are not slanderous per se. They do not impute commission of a punishable crime, a loathsome disease or impugn the ability of plaintiffs in their business, trades or professions. In order to sustain the causes of action, it must appear that the words spoken were wrongfully defamatory of plaintiffs and that special damages resulted therefrom. Sufficient pleading of special damages is required to *7sustain a cause of action for slander where the utterances are not slanderous per se upon the well-founded theory that damages are presumed to result from words actionable per se whereas words outside such category, which are of a defamatory character, must be pleaded and proved to have resulted in damage. In determining whether the words spoken were or were not defamatory in nature, the norm of common usage and connotation must be applied in addition to the actual definition of such words. The word “ undesirable ” is defined in its use as an adjective as “ not wanted ” and “ disagreeable ”. In and of itself such a description of a person could not be said to be actionable. However, when coupled with other words descriptive of a person such as “character” and “intimidation” the definition of which is “ the act of making fearful by threats ” the complete descriptive phrase may well be subject to connotation as defamatory in the minds of hearers to a degree that a person so described would be shunned socially and businesswi.se, the latter resulting in financial loss. If such interpretation of the phrase spoken is capable, then coupled in the complaint with a sufficient allegation of special damage resulting therefrom, the cause of action must be held sufficient. The court finds that the first three causes of action are sufficient. The fourth must be and is dismissed as lacking a sufficient allegation of special damage. Accordingly the motion is denied as to the first three causes stated in the complaint and granted as to the fourth cause of action.
#### Kaina v. Kapalua Land Co., Ltd.

16149

10/9/96

Denied

— Hawai'i —, — P.2d -
### Source Categories Emissions (tons/yr) %Cumulative % Agricultural Chemcials and Pesticides 2.50E-01 13.10 13.10 Industrial Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing 1.57E+00 82.00 95.10 Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing (MON) 4.52E-02 2.37 97.47 Secondary Lead Smelting 4.84E-02 2.53 100.00

Total Emissions 1.91 100.00 

### 1,3-Dichloropropene
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

APPOINTMENT TO THE MINOR
JUDICIARY EDUCATION BOARD :

:

:

: No. 428

MAGISTERIAL RULES DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 26 th day of September , 2018, Carolyn S. Bengel, Esquire,

Allegheny County, is hereby appointed as a member of the Minor Judiciary Education

Board for a term ending July 1, 2021.
DIN COURT OF/

h Court of Appeals '

Pear Ckik.

T I /' / J \/ TH"Y" S. LUSKy v

f/**n i*u tiff!**, o-f C4*^ o-f &<//r<jrr ~7^*

Wf FW 20SY <t«ntssi<L CJ^ % 7?fit

AftJ -/2- 2 Off

Owft yi/o -)z- /r- 000i,?C<

ifCiii Cou(\ C*s*. si/n*>>4*,

0Q7-///6-/O

MtH ffr 20S</

Te>»its£et Co Jo.

<* 7sffl

v
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Requesting Wildlife Services Support 

Last Modified: 

Print

Wildlife Services has offices in every State ready to support you in resolving your

wildlife damage concerns. Contact your local office for information on wildlife

damage management, technical assistance, and support for your management

efforts.
Contact Our State Offices

Wildlife Services leads our Nation's efforts to manage conflicts between people and

wildlife so they can coexist. We have professionals available throughout the country

to help address wildlife-related problems, such as livestock predation, crop losses,

property damage, and more. What can we help you with?

Get information about managing wildlife damage caused by feral swine,

vultures, waterfowl, starlings and blackbirds, nutria, beavers, brown tree snakes

, or other wildlife.

Learn how nonlethal predator management can protect livestock on your farm

or ranch.

Confirm if APHIS has conducted wildlife management activities, such as rabies

oral vaccination bait drops, in your area.

Find out about focus areas of wildlife management in your State.

Wildlife Damage Assistance

Find your State office in the dropdown menu or call 866-4USDA-WS to be

automatically routed to a State office based on the area code you are calling from.

- Select a State - ▾

Loading...

Requesting Wildlife Services Support Contacts

Learn About Wildlife Services' Work

National Programs 

Wildlife Services provides Federal leadership and expertise to resolve wildlife

conflicts to allow people and wildlife to coexist. Our national programs are vital to

the success of this mission. 

Operational Activities 

Our employees carryout a range of operational activities to protect agriculture,

natural resources, property and health and safety. 

Protected Resources 
We use an integrated wildlife damage management approach to protect agriculture,

natural resources, property, and human health and safety.

National Wildlife Research Center 

The National Wildlife Research Center is the research unit of Wildlife

Services. Scientists and support staff are dedicated to finding solutions to

challenging wildlife damage management problems related to agriculture, natural

resources, property, and human health and safety.
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

New World Screwworm Emergency

Response

Last Modified: 

Print

The materials on this page are specific to New World screwworm (NWS). You can use

these tools and resources to prepare for and respond to an outbreak of this pest.

We also offer general materials that apply not only to NWS, but other foreign animal

pests and diseases as well. To view these materials, visit Foreign Animal Disease

Preparedness and Response.

NWS Response and Policy Information

Learn more about our response to an NWS outbreak.

Strategy and Policy

Disease Response Strategy NWS Myiasis (January 2018)

Cooperative Screwworm Eradication Program Environmental Assessment

(August 2017)

Fly Assessment Form (June 2017)

Fly Surveillance and Site Selection Methods (May 2017)
NWS Resources

Find detailed resources concerning an NWS outbreak.

NWS Ready Reference Guides 

Information About Prior Outbreaks

Final Report for the APHIS Veterinary Services Response to the 2016–2017 New

World Screwworm Outbreak in Florida (May 2017)

Powerpoint to the Final Report for the APHIS Veterinary Services Response to

the 2016–2017 New World Screwworm Outbreak in Florida (May 2017)

Map Video: New World Screwworm Investigations in the United States, January

2016–April 2017

Map Video: New World Screwworm Investigations in Florida, January 2016–April

2017

Related Links

Carcass Management Dashboard

Emergency Management Response System 2.0

African Swine Fever Emergency Response

Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Emergency Response

Foot-and-Mouth Disease Emergency Response

Virulent Newcastle Disease Emergency Response

National Veterinary Stockpile

Veterinary Services Training and Exercise Program
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

Testing Protocols (PROs)

Last Modified: 

Print

Testing Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures

BB

Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures for the

Bacteriology Section

VIR

Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures for the

Virology Section

Other Protocols and Standard Operating Procedures

CVB-SOP-0102

Using Software to Estimate Relative Potency (February

25, 2023)
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply620Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Jay Bulkley (n... (not verified)PermalinkApril 12, 2019 - 3:00pmWow! What a great, inspiring, real story.  Thanks for sharing!
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE  COMMISSION FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998, AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY  REFERENCE TO SUCH  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS.  THIS
SCHEDULE  HAS BEEN  UPDATED TO REFLECT  THE  ADOPTION  OF  FINANCIAL  ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS BOARD STATEMENT NO. 128, "EARNINGS PER SHARE."
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                     SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                            $1,593,000
<SECURITIES>                                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     49,767,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                               0
<INVENTORY>                                        4,466,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  60,408,000
<PP&E>                                            35,336,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (8,102,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   141,357,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             54,220,000
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                          60,196,000
<OTHER-SE>                                         3,001,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     141,357,000
<SALES>                                           45,908,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  45,908,000
<CGS>                                             34,543,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     34,543,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   6,606,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   691,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    4,068,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                       1,902,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                2,166,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                       2,166,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            .18
        


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FISCAL YEAR
ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                             910
<SECURITIES>                                       101
<RECEIVABLES>                                      527
<ALLOWANCES>                                        40
<INVENTORY>                                      1,868
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,498
<PP&E>                                             769
<DEPRECIATION>                                     588
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,062
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              707
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,128
<OTHER-SE>                                         227
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     4,062
<SALES>                                          5,472
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,382
<CGS>                                            3,937
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,462
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  13
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     28
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01
        

</TABLE>
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    Homecommentreply3241Add new comment
Add new comment
        
                  Jayasri (Joyce) Hart (not verified)PermalinkJuly 21, 2021 - 7:36amI wonder if along with the "groundskeeper with a broom, dustpan, horse and buggy," there was a groundskeeper with a hose. I vaguely remember pictures of streets being watered down.
ReplyYour name
Email Address
        The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Comment
About text formats
Plain text
  
  
      
          No HTML tags allowed.
                      Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
                      Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
#### Sayville Federal, Savings & Loan Association, Plaintiff, *v.*Gustave N. Schons et al., Defendants.

County Court, Suffolk County,

November 3, 1958.

*Tuck & Van Brunt*for plaintiff.

*Thom & Boylan for*Herman P. Hawkins and others, defendants.

Fred J. Munder, J.

In this action to foreclose a mortgage the surveyors, Hawkins *&*Webb, were named parties defendant, as claiming a lien on the premises which allegedly accrued subsequently to the lien of the mortgage. These defendants now. move for summary judgment, adjudging their lien to be superior and prior to the lien of the mortgage and that it be first paid out *55of the proceeds of sale in the event foreclosure is granted. On cross motion the mortgagee admits the priority of the surveyors’ lien and asks leave to discontinue the action as to these defendants.

It is now conceded that Hawkins & Webb filed their notice of lien prior to the execution of the mortgage herein, that in November of 1957 suit was commenced in this court to foreclose the lien against all the parties to this action, and that upon the filing of a bond the lien was discharged by order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, on November 22, 1957. That action is still pending. In the present action, instituted July 22, 1958, the superiority and continuance of the lien are therefore not at issue.

In opposing the plaintiff’s cross motion the lienors further contend that the discontinuance should not be permitted because (1) they are necessary parties to the action, and (2) they are seeking affirmative relief.

The claim that they are necessary parties is untenable. The only proper and necessary parties to a foreclosure action are the mortgagee, the mortgagor and those who have acquired rights under them subsequent to the mortgage. (See *Harrison*v. *Bain Estates,*2 Misc 2d 52 and case therein cited.)

There remains only the question of whether it would be unjust and inequitable-to eliminate them as defendants in this action once they have been joined and seek affirmative relief. It manifestly would not. The validity of their lien is already at issue and will be determined in the pending mechanics’ lien action. In light of the bond given to discharge the lien in that action these defendants have no further interest in the real property and are not entitled to the relief they seek in this action. The bond has taken the place of the property and becomes the subject of the lien. *(Morton*v. *Tucker,*145 N. Y. 244; *Schriefer*v. *Hewlett Manor Co.,*228 App. Div. 649.) The mechanics ’ lien action, though ostensibly one to foreclose the lien, is in reality one only to test its validity had it not been discharged, and, if found valid, to procure a judgment on the bond. *(White Plains Sash & Door Co.*v. *Doyle,*262 N. Y. 16.)

The motion for summary judgment is denied.

The cross motion to discontinue this action as to the defendants Hawkins *&*Webb, is granted upon the payment by the plaintiff of taxable costs to the date of this application.

Settle order accordingly.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 452 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 452

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require the Clerk 
  of the House to conduct the election of the Speaker of the House by 
                             secret ballot.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 30, 2015

 Mr. Ashford submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                         the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require the Clerk 
  of the House to conduct the election of the Speaker of the House by 
                             secret ballot.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This resolution may be cited as the ``Effective Leadership 
Elections for Congressional Trust Resolution''.

SEC. 2. ELECTION OF SPEAKER OF HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BY SECRET 
              BALLOT.

    Clause 2 of rule II of the Rules of the House of Representatives is 
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
    ``(l) The Clerk shall conduct the election of the Speaker by secret 
ballot.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Doe, In re

25109

09/29/2003

Affirmed
#### State v. Asarin.

27728

03/19/2008

Affirmed
May 18, 2007

26568

#### United Public Workers, AFSCME, Local 646, AFL-CIO v. Shimizu

Dismissed
September 14, 2006

26982

#### Bohannon v. City and County of Honolulu

Affirmed